Purushottam Poudel v. Eric Holder, Jr.
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Purushottam Poudel (“Poudel”), a native and citizen of Nepal, petitions for review of a final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) affirming the denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). Poudel contends that he faced past persecution from Maoists in Nepal due to his social group and political opinion, and that consequently he has a well founded fear of facing future persecution if he is removed to Nepal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252 (a). We deny the petition.
I
Poudel’s contention that the immigration judge erred in finding that he did not provide sufficient corroborating evidence to support his claims is not properly before us. The BIA resolved Poudel’s claims on the merits, concluding that he did not establish either past persecution or a well founded fear of future persecution. We read the BIA’s statement that it “need not address” Poudel’s argument regarding corroboration to suggest that Poudel would not be entitled to relief even if he had provided all the corroborating evidence that the immigration judge apparently would have appreciated.